“it is a distant aspiration that fails to motivate anything other than occasional nostalgia”
The News Letter reports some interesting quotes from former senior Provisional IRA member, now an organiser of the Independent Workers’ Union, Tommy McKearney’s new book – The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament. From the News Letter report
The ardent socialist, who now organises the Independent Workers’ Union, says that Sinn Fein has become increasingly right wing as it has gone further and further into government at Stormont, where, he argues, “contrary to talk of power-sharing, the [Stormont] administration is almost powerless” because it lacks control over the economy.
He says that the deal between Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness ended ‘the Irish national question’ for most.
“Difficult though it was for some to accept, it was clear that no significant section of Irish society was prepared at that time to contest in any determined fashion the constitutional arrangements on the island.
“Irish people had voted in huge numbers for the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 and have stayed loyal to its promoters at each election since.
“There remains, of course, a widely-shared but not intensely sought-after aspiration that the Six Counties might one day come under Dublin’s jurisdiction.
“For the vast majority, though, it is a distant aspiration that fails to motivate anything other than occasional nostalgia.”
He argues that republicans now need to actively engaged with working class Protestants to build support for a socialist Ireland as “a one-plank republican platform confined to breaking the Union and ending partition is not capable of mobilising sufficient support to bring about the type of fundamental change required”.
He also says that Ian Paisley’s claims that the 1998 Belfast Agreement were a “sell-out” helped Sinn Fein delude more hardline IRA members into believing that they were on the path to a united Ireland.
“The republican leadership was greatly helped by the hysterical reaction of the DUP who, for its own tactical reasons, was insisting that the agreement was a betrayal of the Union.
“In contrast, it was the Ulster Unionist Party leader David Trimble who described the situation most accurately.
“He reminded everyone that accepting the constitutional status quo could only be changed by a majority vote in the six counties meant that the Good Friday Agreement in reality had secured the future of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom.”
[Partitionist! - Ed] Some still have to be reminded of that fact…
Topic: Government, Politics, Society and Culture
Region: Ireland, Northern Ireland, UK
Alan N/Ards:
Regarding the Vatican’s meddling: read the Taoiseach’s recent statement to the Dail. I very much doubt he could be much clearer on this point.
Charminator
A simple point which you’ve been unable to persuasively refute.
“I do not accept those assertions, I’ve suggested that there are individual TDs who would likely be livid at the suggestions ”
- Yeah, so ?
“I have no doubt the respective party leaders do not accept this view”.
- Good for view, that’s one opinion.
” FG and FF already represent a majority”.
- Yeah, that’s my point – you been sensing an urgency around unity as a matter of national priority that’s not discernible to me or to anyone else, huh ?
“your view that SF have to undertake some sort of charm offensive in the South to persuade the populace of the Free State (sic) of the merits of unity is both unfounded and risible”.
- I didn’t make such a suggestion; I am challenging the notion that all they have to do is run the clock out and when 50% + 1 happens, it’s happy fenian day. Based on the political structures and currents we have now or have had for the last few decades I just don’t see that and I think that your apparent confidence in the nationalism of the mainstream political supporters and/or their supporters is misplaced and that history backs this up.
Thanks Nunoftheabove.
You said initially:
“For me, they (SF) have all their work still ahead of them persuading the free stste populace that [unity is] desirable from their point of view too and let’s not lose sight of that either.”
You’ve rejected the relevance of our main parties TDs on this issue and their leaders (“that’s one opinion” – not though exactly as if all opinions are equal in such matters), but I ask again, from where does the exotic notion that the people of the Free State (sic) need to be persuaded of unity come from?
I’ve engaged in a fairly searching journey with you of our main parties and I can see no currents of such an opinion. Now we can all make speculative claims of this and that, but I see no shades of such an opinion emerging in any of our major parties.
Your view that SF have to undertake some sort of charm offensive in the South to persuade the populace of the Free State (sic) of the merits of unity is both unfounded and risible. Now, you claim you didn’t make such a suggestion but you let’s recall again what you said: “For me, they (SF) have all their work still ahead of them persuading the free stste populace that [unity is] desirable from their point of view too and let’s not lose sight of that either.” If that doesn’t equate to needing a charm offensive of some sort, I don’t know what does.
Regarding FF and FG constituting a majority, you say:
“Yeah, that’s my point – you been sensing an urgency around unity as a matter of national priority that’s not discernible to me or to anyone else, huh?”
But I never said there was any “urgency”. There’s absolutely no urgency. It’s not a dynamic which rests with FF or FG or the southern body politic: it’s one which must be driven by preferences in the North. Again, you seem to expect some sort of National preference within Republicanism or Nationalism that unity must be imminent. Not so and I think that’s the essence of what NordieNorthsider was trying to convey at the outset.
In sum, unlike you, I do not believe that SF “have all their work still ahead of them persuading the free stste populace that [unity is] desirable from their point of view too and let’s not lose sight of that either.”
“Unionists have to win every time, for once you lose you’re voting block will be c 750k in a country of 7.5 million and the clock is never turning back.”.
neil, don’t count on this, someone mentioned Kosovo, and kosovo set a precendent, a small part of an nation can secede and set up on its own.
Shush lest Greenflag gets back on his one-time hobby horse.
lamhdearg -
“someone mentioned Kosovo, and kosovo set a precendent, a small part of an nation can secede and set up on its own.”
That would never happen here.
grandimarkey: That would never happen here.
That would never happen here *again*. But remember, everyone was already discussing hypotheticals – what’s one more added to the mix?
It depends on how you wish to define acceptable borders within which self-determination can or should reasonably be exercised. Kosovo’s borders can be argued to continue to be somewhat fluid, of course. As and when UI becomes something even worth disussing as a remote possibility then all prevailing assumtions about what it can or should look like or operate will need to go into the bin and due consideration given to some degree of federation, stronger ethno-religious rights protections and all the rest of it. It’s as well to continue to monitor the Kosovos of the world though in terms of the principles in play as well as what does and doesn’t work practically in terms of inclusion, minority rights, transitional provisions and all the rest of it.
We all know “Irish unity” was a bubble that burst many moons ago and the sooner thee bhoys catch on the better for us all.
I would be very skeptical of either the British or Irish Govt facilitating any sort of exotic arrangements beyond the boundaries of the GFA principles. Given that it’s an international agreement, I also suspect the Irish Govt will not enter into, never mind entertain, any changes which envisage some sort of ‘Gibraltarisation’. I also suspect international opinion – if there was a vote in favour of unity – would be less than supportive of efforts to then change the rules of the game (ie afford to some counties or regions in the North something which was not afforded to Fermanagh or Tyrone, when partition was initially implemented).
All of this, of course, makes the observation all the more relevant that the Irish State – as presently constructed – could never endure post-unity. A great, great many changes would be necessary to facilitate something resembling a compromise accommodation. I’d hope the broad thrust of Republicanism (not the loonies or Socialist Republic fanatics) would be open-minded about this.
Which happily leads me to acknowledge some measure of agreement with Nunoftheabove that post-unity:
“[D]ue consideration [would need to be] given to some degree of federation, stronger ethno-religious rights protections and all the rest of it.”
Happily can agree with this.
An Ireland, post-unity, will be a very, very different place – a reality Republicanism needs to begin to consider. The architecture of such an Irish State will look radically different than that which we have today and that process in itself will take time and arduous negotiations.
Charminator
But don’t you think that transitoning to some form of unified end game would be much the more achievable by virtue of the fact that there was less to change in a hurried fashion in order to bring it about; in other words, get the accommodation structurally sound and the interior decorations and repairs well in hand well in advance and thus make the move-in more of an inconvenient grunt than a stress-busting hard slog albeit with adequate scope for the new folks to influence the layout of the furniture and the colour of the kids bedroom’s at their leisure in the months and years afterwards having acclimatized ? At least, having the place spic and span with the kettle on and a packet of Rich Tea ready once the key’s turned wouldn’t be too much to ask, right ? This would not only make the transitioning much more do-able, it would make the potential tenants much more likely to semi-envisage moving homes to begin with.
neil, don’t count on this, someone mentioned Kosovo, and kosovo set a precendent, a small part of an nation can secede and set up on its own.
Put that into context though Lamhdearg. When Nationalists (hypothetically) win the border referendum, you expect them then to instantly change their minds and vote for an independent state?
Nope. If Nationalism ever wins the battle, NI Loyalists/Unionists will simply have to suck it up. In the same way that Nationalists have been forced to do the same for generations. 50%+1 and it’s game over bud. It keeps the status quo, and it’s enough to change it.
neil,
“kosovo set a precendent, a small part of an nation can secede and set up on its own.”, this is what i commented, i commented nothing about irish nat changing their minds, in Kosove a tiny part of Serbia the small minority of muslims(of Serbia) went to war with the rest of Serbia, the end result is that Kosove has seceded from Serbia. as Reader comments , ” That would never happen here *again*. But remember, everyone was already discussing hypotheticals – what’s one more added to the mix?”.
Kosovo, sorry, ps this is not what i want to see.
Maybe we should re-partition now. Fermanagh, Tyrone, Armagh and Derry go back to the Republic. Oh and Belfast too.
Lamhdearg,
Fair enough.
Lionel,
That would be great. Increase the 26 to 30 and you still have South Down and the Glens to continue the struggle for the final 2.
@Lionel
That would leave Newry as some kind of faux-Berlin!
Imagine, the Clanrye Wall spread across the bridges over the river. Would be a laugh.
The airlifts to Belfast would be some banter too.
Lionel Hutz: Maybe we should re-partition now. Fermanagh, Tyrone, Armagh and Derry go back to the Republic. Oh and Belfast too.
Belfast is split between Antrim and Down. Or while you’re at it, what about Coleraine and Portadown?
But anyway, if you are planning to separate Belfast from its economic hinterland (and commuter belt), you have gone hysterical.
You actually want the lot. Therefore you will have to wait. Probably forever.
Hmm. On second thoughts – your plan means my Belfast employer pays peanuts in corporation tax, I live in Bangor and get RoI wages, pay UK taxes, and my family gets the NHS. If any of them drop out they can become benefits tourists. Let me do some sums…
Well as a nationalist given my United Ireland bubble is burst I can always try to take comfort in the fact that there is increasingly a single Island wide system of infrastructure. In terms of roads, there are more than 300 roads connecting the North and the south Of Ireland, and only a few ferries connecting us to Britain (3 of those go to Scotland), In terms of electricity the state owned electric network of the South now supplies us with green power. We have a single gas network. Our corporation taxation system is starting to look surprisingly like that of the ROI.
The fact that the combined vote for all unionist parties has fallen consistantly and without fail in every single election since the foundation of the state.
And Finally, the great elephant in the room. We in the North enjoy a level of public service in terms of helth care, education and social welfare that those in England that actually pick up the tab can only dream of. Sooner or later the great 100 year binge on other peoples money will come to an end and who knows what the hangover will bring?
…there are more than 300 roads connecting the North and the south Of Ireland, and only a few ferries connecting us to Britain (3 of those go to Scotland),
There has been something recently called *air travel* which has er… taken off, meaning I can be over to the mainland rather quicker than those ferries and rather qucker than I would reach much of the south and west of the Republic by road. We live in 2011, not just the world but also the Irish Sea is getting smaller.
Considering the ROI is the only EU country which the UK actually shares a border with, then I am surprised and disappointed there isn’t more economic cooperation on a mutually beneficial basis.
The fact that the combined vote for all unionist parties has fallen consistantly and without fail in every single election since the foundation of the state.
Not the case since 2001, evidence here:http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/.
Yes, less people in total, across the board, voting full stop- is that apathy good news for unionism or nationalism?
But if Irish nationalism really fancies its chances in a Border Poll, then shouldn’t it be putting just a bit more pressure on Paterson for one? You could coincide it with Salmond’s in scotland, that could be interesting…
Nunoftheabove:
“But don’t you think that transitoning to some form of unified end game would be much the more achievable by virtue of the fact that there was less to change in a hurried fashion in order to bring it about”
Yes, I do agree: as I said earlier, there’s no “urgency” with this process. I think it’s a fluid process and whilst the engine must be that of Northern consent, I also acknowledge that there are signals that can be sent from the south regarding the sort of post-unity Ireland we imagine. In some respects, I think this process has begun: on an operational level, cross-border consultation is now the norm, not the exception, and there are a great many examples of Ireland being asked to raise issues or concerns at EU level, where ordinarily one would expect such concerns to be articulated via London (agriculture and marine issues for one). In others sectors, we see similar attempts at convergence (eg infrastructural development, tourism).
However, “constitutional” interior decorations and repairs (to follow your analogy) arguably needs a stakeholder at the other side of the table to help guide matters: and, of course, that remains unlikely until the possibility of unity grows closer (ie the very people whose input is necessary – Unionist representatives – are less likely to engage, until the possibility of the end of the Union grows more likely).
But I do agree that whilst the primary dynamic is that of consent in the North, there are signals that can be sent from the Irish Establishment that could influence it, ie make unity more distant or perhaps even more proximate (or as you rightly put it “This would not only make the transitioning much more do-able, it would make the potential tenants much more likely to semi-envisage moving homes to begin with”). I think President McAleese has recognised this and both Ahern and Cowen did too. Positive neighbourly relations needed to be developed first: and that’s happening on a daily basis. I think we’re also seeing Republican Ireland recognise more the complexity of our collective history and culture and that’s important too in demonstrating the versatility of modern Ireland in accommodating Unionism’s cultural preferences and identity.
Now, I’d certainly favour enhanced dialogue between all stakeholders about the full implications of unity (amongst which, I should add, I happen to regard economics as something of a red herring, compared to the legal, constitutional, or even cultural dimensions), but I fear Unionism’s representatives (at this juncture), may well view the electoral risks too great to even countenance talking about what a unified Ireland may look like.
Charminator
Quite although this is an information age and what would be – ok, reluctantly – palatable to (progressive) unionists post-UK would be palatable to most progressive southerners anyway – separation of church and state, individual rights orientation etc. My point is the interior designers wouldn’t only need an eye for northern perspectives – absence of willing stakeholder point entirely taken – they/we could crate something genuinely new that critical mass in both states would prefer to either of the amateurish, religion-ridden under-evolved heaps of shit we have at the moment.
Nun
1. What would you accept of evidence that FG and FF support unity, short of advocating armed intervention or a massive compaign of civil disobediance? There is no ‘urgeny’ as you put because there is no chance, with demographics as they are, of the North voting for unity at the present point in time.
You’re the one who made the assertion that they don’t really support unity, that their actions aren’t actions of parties that support unity, but you have provided no evidence. Yet you demand evidence from Charm, only to discard out of hand all the evidene he presents.
If you have provided evidence, please copy and paste for me because I have missed it.
so
1.) What would you accept as evidence that FG and FF support unity, short of advocating armed intervention or a advocating massive compaign of civil disobediance?
2.) What actions have they taken which show they do not support Irish unity?
‘unity’
Let me try a third time. “urgency”
Apologies to all.
Northern Ireland may be governed from Westminster, but with the goodwill of Dublin. That’s not joint sovereignty, but de facto it’s joint rule. de Jure rule lies with Westminster and de facto with Westminster and the Dail.
Stormont parish council acts a puppet show pretending to make a difference.
All of this is good. We get RTE Sports (and TV3 Euro Football) and grants and good pensions.
We’re in fucking clover here, Irish or whatever, we just need not to fuck it up. Keep calm and carry on.
Most of Europe are looking for a paddle for their canoe and we’re still being handed out £££.
Would anyone object to this benign system of joint rule, but not joint sovereignty, for the next 40+ years of the status quo? Didn’t think so.
Let’s face it.
Since it’s formation, the Republic of Ireland has always been an economic basket case.
It’s biggest export has always been it’s people.
The only time in it’s history when it’s population grew was during the Celtic Tiger era , and we know what happened to that.
If people believe that northern Nationalists/Catholics are all going to vote themselves into a united Ireland, so they can join the queue leaving the country, (usually to England), to get jobs, then they need to get into the real world.
“Well as a nationalist given my United Ireland bubble is burst I can always try to take comfort in the fact that there is increasingly a single Island wide system of infrastructure. In terms of roads, there are more than 300 roads connecting the North and the south Of Ireland, and only a few ferries connecting us to Britain (3 of those go to Scotland), In terms of electricity the state owned electric network of the South now supplies us with green power. We have a single gas network. Our corporation taxation system is starting to look surprisingly like that of the ROI.”
JR,
If we got someone at Road Service to change the style of the road signs and paint things a little differently on the tarmac, you might not even spot that there is border at all.
You point to the real issue, as each year goes by, we inch closer and closer to a fully United Ireland. Its happening by the back door.
I happen to think that the constitutional referndum will make little practical difference when it comes. It’ll just involve some redundancies in the civil service.
“Lionel Hutz: Maybe we should re-partition now. Fermanagh, Tyrone, Armagh and Derry go back to the Republic. Oh and Belfast too.
Belfast is split between Antrim and Down. Or while you’re at it, what about Coleraine and Portadown?
But anyway, if you are planning to separate Belfast from its economic hinterland (and commuter belt), you have gone hysterical.
You actually want the lot. Therefore you will have to wait. Probably forever.”
Actually Reader,
I’ll swap you Coleraine and Portadown for South Down. Fair deal???
We could have the new border sweeping along the along the lower Bann – You can have Coleraine. The Border continues to Lough Neagh and runs East then South East just giving the new Norn Iron a Border Town of Antrim. Then the Border cuts a more Easterly Direction towards Belfast Lough, just giving Norn Iron Newtownabbey and Carrick, the Border swoops around Belfast, so that the majority naitonalist city remains part of the new Republic. Norn Iron can keep the likes of Holywood and Dundonald. Then the Border turns round and circles Belfast cutting across the M1 at around Dunmurry and heads back towards the Lough Neagh and then rejoins the M1 so that Norn Iron keeps Lurgan and Portadown. Finally the Border moves south at around Maghery, Anaghmore and and then South East so that Banbridge remains in Norn Iron and the Border meets the Coast at around Newcastle.
SIMPLES
Brian
1. I’m not saying that they’e not nationalist, I’m saying that their nationalism is very largely rhetorical. Examples from recent history of tangible steps they have taken in furtherance of this objective and which, to any degree, have measurably brought the realization of the objective closer or made it more likely than it might otherwise have been anyway. You can use the north-south-east-west relationships paradigm to explain this if you like. That might do.
2. Your answer to 1 will, I’m confident, answer (2) for you on my behalf.
tomthumbuk,
You talk as if Protestants and Catholics from the north don’t flock to England! What about the “brain drain” of NI’s youth to England? Many of them not returning. Being under the jurisdiction of Westminster and not the Dáil doesn’t change the fact they still left their home island of Ireland for jobs or education in England.
Ireland’s relationship with England in that regard is similar to the amount of New Zealanders who flock to Australia for more jobs and opportunites every year. (Why don’t those silly Kiwis just give their sovereignty to Australia’s parliament, I wonder!)
Although over 5 million people from Britain live abroad so it seems they’re good at exporting people, too.
TomthumbUK,
Lets not forget where the ROI was coming form in economic terms. The truth is that it has been able to prosper since leaving the UK. It enjoyed wealth for the first time really with the Celtic Tiger and they made mistakes. They have to learn from them.
Its not as if the UK has always got it right. Look what happened in 1976.
But the Republic will recover and crucially, even with a loss of some economic sovereignty to the EU, the Republic still has the ability to create the conditions for growth.
As part of the UK, the best Northern Ireland can hope for is continued subsidy.
Northern Ireland has a growing population.
The movement of students to GB is explained by many factors, not primarily economic.
As for the subsidy, it’s a by product of being a partner in a wider political unit, ie the U.K.
We are entitled to it.
Did you ever hear anyone complaining in the Republic when they were getting the benefits of E.U. money?
Now the money has gone and they have to stand on their own two feet. It seems the only way they can generate wealth is by enticing tax dodging corporations by undercutting the other EU states. Much to the chagrin of Germany and France.
The U.K. government has a responsibility to maintain a certain parity of wealth within it’s borders.
As long as we continue to get a “subsidy” that’s fine by me although it would be nice if, one day, we were so well off that we could subsidide other parts of the U.K., but I wouldn’t bet on it.
As for whether and when the Republic recover, we’ll just have to wait and see.
Hopefully the present political leadership there will show a degree more commitment to proper economic management and integrity then the self serving Del Boys who have run the country in the past.